Barack Obama, our next President

Demos wrote:

<quoted text>
Did he keep your children safe or did he send them off to an unnecessary, un-provoked, manufactured war?

My children and your children would be old enough to make their own decision to volunatarily join the armed forces knowing that joining the armed forces may mean having to pay the ultimate price to keep not only the United States but the entire world safe. In that case, I would support their decision wholeheartedly. If they didn't want to serve in that endeavor, it would have been their mistake and not the commander-in-chief's, wouldn't it? But putting the blame on a president who was responsible for the safety of so many in a time of extreme uncertainty seems to be something you find easy to do.

-Uncle Ted- wrote:

<quoted text>
So you you say that the White Male is not locked out on city bids?

So far we have nothing to go on but the bare assertion of a raving bigot

Grampy wrote:

<quoted text>
On, että laastari korjaussarja. Estää deflaatiosta.
http://www.motivatedphotos.com/...

Ei yleisö täällä.

Samaa asiaa uudestaan ja uudestaan on tyhmä

Demos wrote:

<quoted text>
So you listened to it without the voice-over and you still come up with this nonsense? Here's the transcript:
"And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is ok and that eating shellfish is abomination? How about Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith? Or should we just stick to the Sermon on the Mount - a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application? So before we get carried away, let's read our bibles. Folks haven't been reading their bibles. "
You're an excellent example of somebody that needs to go back and read the directions again, might start with the Sermon on the Mount and see how the DOD's gonna get along with the Golden Rule and turning the other cheek.

Yep, that's what he said. And what was the point exactly?

You may have forgotten that Jesus got extremely angry driving out the traders in the temple. I mean, REAL mad.

I think we're not supposed to let our anger be in vain or be used for evil. It doesn't mean we are supposed to embrace it.

But please tell me again why it was necessary or important for Obama to have even made that speech?

lily boca raton fl wrote:

<quoted text> Funny. It is typical American culture to immediately blame someone or some entity for the occurance of an incident rather than objectively looking at the the possibility that one could have done things differently.

Samaa asiaa uudestaan ja uudestaan on tyhmä
-
FL-paskaamarjat!

LIBERAL BEAT DOWN wrote:

<quoted text>
Another lefty nut meg blinded by the radical far left agenda of Affirmative Action.
Discrimination against the white male.
You don't know what you're talking about. Open your eyes.

Thanx again my friend! The Alinsky liberal will always keep telling you the moon is just the sun at night even though we all know it is not.

Demos wrote:

<quoted text>
You can clearly see the hope, they hope it happens so they can say they were right. Sick, pathetic basterds.

Actually, I didn't see that at all. Only you assuming such.

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
My children and your children would be old enough to make their own decision to volunatarily join the armed forces knowing that joining the armed forces may mean having to pay the ultimate price to keep not only the United States but the entire world safe. In that case, I would support their decision wholeheartedly. If they didn't want to serve in that endeavor, it would have been their mistake and not the commander-in-chief's, wouldn't it? But putting the blame on a president who was responsible for the safety of so many in a time of extreme uncertainty seems to be something you find easy to do.

Yes it is their choice and it is the government's responsibility to only put them in harm's way in defense of the country; its in the Constitution.

Demos wrote:

<quoted text>
Sounds nice but the facts don't support it. Why is the UE rate 9.8% for white men over twenty and 16.9% for black men over twenty?
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.ht...

Because many of them would rather sit at the little store in the hood and smoke crack and drink beer. Or hook up the Ho down the street with 5 kids and live off her welfare and food stamps.

Take a look at any large company or government agency like a Broward Country School District.

There are many departments in that school system that are all black, there are barely any even hispanics. The affirmative action policies get them in and then they get in management and all they hire is black. It's umbeleivable what they get away with. There are internal ivestagations as we speak on this issue.

Look, I'm not going to go back and forth with you on this. I know and anybody who cares to know this is true.

You don't care, it's all right with me. You would care if it happened to your family member or your self.

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Yep, that's what he said. And what was the point exactly?
You may have forgotten that Jesus got extremely angry driving out the traders in the temple. I mean, REAL mad.
I think we're not supposed to let our anger be in vain or be used for evil. It doesn't mean we are supposed to embrace it.
But please tell me again why it was necessary or important for Obama to have even made that speech?

Who said it was important or necessary? Politicians make speeches, its what they do. That you choose to remain ignorant and twist the meaning to support your own prejudices is what you do. What I do is ridicule your ignorance.

See? It all works out; everybody's doing their part.

Demos wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes it is their choice and it is the government's responsibility to only put them in harm's way in defense of the country; its in the Constitution.

-
Americans soldiers fought the Nazi's for four years, hundreds of thousands of casualties.
-

Patrick wrote:

<quoted text>
Samaa asiaa uudestaan ja uudestaan on tyhmä
-
FL-paskaamarjat!

sovittu Kuka päästi koirat paskaa talossa?

lizbeth wrote:

<quoted text> Hows it working for you, dec 26 '09. Still
believe in Santa Clause. Tonight children are crying because
of your man of change. They never knew Bush They are loving
the likes of you, NOT

Obama Clause came by my house and redistributed all my presents to the 4th ward. Oh well maybe next year will be better.

lily boca raton fl wrote:

<quoted text>"Bush kept her safe"

The 10 terror plots disrupted under Bush:

- "The West Coast Airliner Plot": In mid-2002 the United States disrupted a plot to attack targets on the West Coast of the United States using hijacked airplanes. The plotters included at least one major operational planner involved in planning September 11.

- "The East Coast Airliner Plot": In mid-2003 the United States and an unnamed "partner" disrupted a plot to attack targets on the East Coast of the United States using hijacked commercial airplanes.

- "The Jose Padilla Plot": In May 2002 the United States foiled a plot that involved blowing up apartment buildings in the United States. One of the plotters, US citizen Jose Padilla, also discussed the possibility of using a "dirty bomb" in the United States.

- "The 2004 UK Urban Targets Plot": In mid-2004 the United States and "partners" disrupted a plot that involved urban targets in Britain. These plots involved using explosives against a variety of sites.

- "The 2003 Karachi Plot": In the spring 2003 the United States and "a partner" disrupted a plot to attack Westerners at several targets in Karachi, Pakistan.

- "The Heathrow Airport Plot": In 2003 the United States and "several partners" disrupted a plot to attack Heathrow Airport using hijacked commercial airliners. The planning for this attack was undertaken by a "major" September 11 operational figure.

- "The 2004 UK Plot": In the Spring of 2004 the United States and "partners", using a combination of law enforcement and intelligence resources, disrupted a plot to conduct large-scale bombings in Britain.

- "The 2002 Arabian Gulf Shipping Plot": In late 2002 and 2003 the United States and "a partner nation" disrupted a plot by Al-Qaeda operatives to attack ships in the Arabian Gulf.

- "The 2002 Straits of Hormuz Plot": In 2002 the United States and "partners" disrupted a plot to attack ships transiting the Straits of Hormuz.

- "The 2003 Tourist Site Plot": In 2003 the United States and "a partner nation" disrupted a plot to attack a tourist site outside the United States.

The five casings and infiltrations:

- "The US Government and Tourist Sites Tasking": In 2003 and 2004, an individual was tasked by Al-Qaeda to case important US government and tourist targets within the United States.

- "The Gas Station Tasking": Around 2003, an individual was tasked to collect targeting information on US gas stations and their support mechanisms on behalf of a senior Al-Qaeda planner.

- "Iyman Faris and the Brooklyn Bridge": In 2003, and in conjunction with a partner nation, the US government arrested and prosecuted Iyman Faris, who was exploring the destruction of the Brooklyn Bridge in New York. Faris ultimately pleaded guilty to providing material support to Al-Qaeda and is now in federal prison.

- "2001 Tasking": In 2001, Al-Qaeda sent an individual to facilitate post-September 11 attacks in the United States. US law enforcement authorities arrested the individual.

- "2003 Tasking": In 2003, an individual was tasked by an Al-Qaeda leader to conduct reconnaissance on populated areas in the United States.

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually, I didn't see that at all. Only you assuming such.

Carol, you're one of the most closed-minded people I've ever encountered; you only see what you want to see. When presented with facts that contradict your deeply held prejudices you dismiss or ignore them.

Patrick wrote:

<quoted text>
-
Americans soldiers fought the Nazi's for four years, hundreds of thousands of casualties.
-

isoisä on tullut suomalaine!!

-Uncle Ted- wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanx again my friend! The Alinsky liberal will always keep telling you the moon is just the sun at night even though we all know it is not.

http://riverdaughter.files.wordpress.com/2009...

carol wrote:

<quoted text>
My children and your children would be old enough to make their own decision to volunatarily join the armed forces knowing that joining the armed forces may mean having to pay the ultimate price to keep not only the United States but the entire world safe. In that case, I would support their decision wholeheartedly. If they didn't want to serve in that endeavor, it would have been their mistake and not the commander-in-chief's, wouldn't it? But putting the blame on a president who was responsible for the safety of so many in a time of extreme uncertainty seems to be something you find easy to do.

So what country in the world other than the USA would you like Obama to keep safe now? Where should he send our military and a trillion more dollars to keep safe, Carol?

-Uncle Ted- wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanx again my friend! The Alinsky liberal will always keep telling you the moon is just the sun at night even though we all know it is not.

So true. The facts are all over the place but they will refuse to see it. The hispanic women who just got in the supreme court, only got there because she is hispanic. There were thousands of other people qualified for this position. Forget it, she's a hispanic female so she gets the job.

I am for anyone getting any position out there as long as they get fairly, using an equal process.

Like Obama, I don't think this guy has earned anything in his life. He has gotten where he is from lefty affirmative action hand outs. It makes me sick to think about it.

What can we do, nothing. They won't listen so these policies will never change. Isn't living in the corrupt country of the USA just wonderful.

Demos wrote:

<quoted text>
Who said it was important or necessary? Politicians make speeches, its what they do. That you choose to remain ignorant and twist the meaning to support your own prejudices is what you do. What I do is ridicule your ignorance.
See? It all works out; everybody's doing their part.

Yes, but why that speech in particular? It certainly wasn't a typical political speech.